Metamorphoses

of International Adjudication

This round table focuses on how dispute settlement models are evolving within the broader institutional landscape of international adjudication. It examines the coexistence and interaction of judicial and quasi-judicial mechanisms, as well as arbitration, and considers how their functions are changing.

The central issue, however, is less the replacement of one model by another than the differentiation of existing models and the transformation of their institutional forms. Particular attention will be paid to the distinction and interaction between two distinct approaches: adjudication on the merits and conflict management.

The panel will explore various dimensions of these transformations, including the transformation and reconfiguration of interstate dispute-settlement mechanisms, the reform of investment arbitration, and the development of quasi-judicial mechanisms, UN treaty bodies and other monitoring mechanisms, particularly in the field of human rights.

From a broader perspective, the discussion will also consider international initiatives aimed at developing procedures for the settlement of disputes involving public interests, including mediation, as elements of the institutional architecture of international adjudication.

Key topics for discussion: dispute settlement and conflict management; judicial and quasi-judicial mechanisms, as well as arbitration; transformation of interstate dispute-settlement mechanisms; reform of investment arbitration; reform of human rights bodies and procedures; mediation of disputes involving public interests.

Contemporary international disputes increasingly transcend the classical bilateral model. This round table focuses on the expanding range of participants in international proceedings and the changing conditions of access to international justice across different institutional settings.

This shift is most clearly reflected in the growing involvement of international organisations in international proceedings, both as parties to disputes and as institutional frameworks within which disputes are resolved. Particular attention will be devoted to the relationship between the immunities of international organisations and the right to judicial protection, including fair-trial guarantees, as well as to internal dispute-settlement mechanisms within international organisations and their place in the broader architecture of international adjudication.

At the same time, the participation of non-State actors, including corporations and non-governmental organisations, is also changing. Climate cases increasingly involve new categories of participants, including children, young people, representatives of social movements, and members of the academic community.

Key topics for discussion: expansion of participants in international disputes; transformation of access to justice; multilateral configurations of international proceedings; international organisations as parties to disputes and as frameworks for dispute settlement; the relationship between immunities and the right to judicial protection; forms of participation of non-State actors; new categories of participants in international proceedings; representation of interests in different procedural configurations.

The development of digital technologies, including artificial intelligence, is reshaping how evidentiary records are compiled, the role of expert evidence, and methodologies for fact-finding in international proceedings.

The discussion focuses on the use of digital evidence, remote sensing data, and open-source intelligence (OSINT), as well as on evolving approaches to attribution and causation.

The panel examines how these developments affect the structure of judicial reasoning and the balance between efficiency, verifiability, and public confidence in adjudicative outcomes.

Key topics for discussion: efficiency, reliability, and trustworthiness; digital evidence and OSINT; science and expert evidence in international proceedings; causation and attribution; artificial intelligence and judicial reasoning.

Advisory proceedings constitute a distinct mode of exercising the judicial function in international law, differing from the adjudication of interstate disputes in both procedural and legal terms.

This roundtable examines their functions, roles, and procedural characteristics from a comparative perspective, including the practices of the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. A notable example can be found in the courts of regional integration organisations, where advisory procedures perform not only an interpretative but also a system-building function by ensuring consistency in the application of law within multi-level legal orders.

This comparative inquiry also extends to regional human rights systems, in which advisory proceedings may play an important role in the development of legal standards.

The discussion will explore the extent to which advisory proceedings serve as mechanisms of legal clarification while simultaneously addressing the limitations of contentious proceedings, including in cases involving public interests.

Key topics for discussion: the advisory function and adjudication on the merits; legal clarification and the development of approaches to the application of legal norms; advisory proceedings and public interest; courts of regional integration organisations and their role in the development of law.

This round table focuses on disputes seeking to protect public interests that transcend individual rights and bilateral relations between parties.

The discussion will address approaches to defining public interest, as well as procedural grounds for bringing public interest claims, including questions of admissibility and the limits of expanding procedural standing (locus standi).

Functional equivalents of actio popularis will be examined, including mechanisms based on obligations erga omnes and erga omnes partes. Particular attention will be devoted to human rights cases, where notions of public interest and expanded access to justice have found their most developed institutional expression.

Special consideration will also be given to the role of adjudicative bodies in shaping admissibility criteria for such claims and defining the limits of judicial intervention.

Key topics for discussion: individual and public interests; standing and limits of admissibility; erga omnes and erga omnes partes obligations; functional equivalents of actio popularis; public interest in human rights, environmental, humanitarian, and other interstate disputes.

Environmental disputes provide one of the most illustrative examples of contemporary cases involving multiple levels of regulation and public interests.

The discussion focuses on climate-related disputes, the protection of biodiversity and the marine environment, as well as the interrelationship between environmental obligations and human rights.

Particular attention will be paid to issues of causation, allocation of responsibility, standards of due diligence, evidentiary challenges, the role of scientific expertise, and remedies available in such disputes.

Key topics for discussion: the scale of environmental challenges and the limits of international adjudication; climate litigation, biodiversity protection, and other complex environmental disputes; the relationship between environmental obligations and human rights; causation, allocation of responsibility, and due diligence standards; scientific uncertainty, expert knowledge, and evidentiary issues in environmental disputes; remedies, reparations, and guarantees of non-repetition; legal subjectivity, locus standi, and representation of interests in climate proceedings.

This round table examines interactions between international, including supranational, and domestic courts, as well as among different international judicial and arbitral bodies.

Particular attention will be devoted to parallel proceedings, overlapping jurisdictions, the choice of dispute-settlement mechanisms, and the forms of coordination and competition among judicial and arbitral bodies in a plural jurisdictional landscape.

Against the backdrop of increasing complexity and multiplicity of dispute-settlement mechanisms, the role of domestic courts in addressing questions of international law is undergoing qualitative change. Yet this multiplicity may also affect access to different dispute-settlement procedures, resulting in an uneven distribution of procedural opportunities among participants when selecting a dispute-settlement mechanism.

Key topics for discussion: overlapping jurisdictions and parallel proceedings; choice of dispute-settlement mechanisms; coordination between judicial and arbitral bodies; courts of regional integration organisations; jurisdictional competition and coordination mechanisms.

This round table considers judicial decisions as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law within the meaning of Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice.

The discussion will examine practices of cross-citation, the development of coherent interpretations, and mechanisms of systemic integration, including Article 31(3)(c) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Particular attention will be paid to how judicial decisions influence the development of international law, even as they retain their formal status as subsidiary means for determining legal rules.

Key topics for discussion: judicial decisions as subsidiary means; the approaches of the International Law Commission; cross-citation and coherent interpretations; systemic integration; the role of judicial decisions in the development of international law; the authority and limits of judicial reasoning; unity and fragmentation of international law.